Can the new SL compete or even sostitute in some fields the S?

[geetee1972]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

It's interesting to think while we discuss the virtues of image quality and whether this camera or that offers the ultimate IQ, that it is stil the case that the ultimate IQ is still good old fashioned 8x10 or 4x5 film. I just wish it were easier to work with but then if it was, we would all be doing it.

[Stuart Richardson]

Well, yes and no. I am using 8x10 and 4x5 regularly...more often than the S these days. In many circumstances it is possible to get sharper imagery out of them, but not always. Certainly the image quality is unique, but image quality can mean a lot of different things. For example, 8x10 is inherently soft...it just hits you with brute force in terms of film area. The 100% detail is fairly low in most cases, due to things like miniscule depth of field, film sag and imprecision in the cameras and lenses (the tolerances of a giant wood camera with friction mount lenses and film backs, combined with 250mm-600mm lenses means that you are not getting tack sharp grain level resolution like you might with an M7 and 50mm APO Summicron. You are saved by the gigantic size. This holds to scanning as well, where 8x10 is rarely scanned at as high a quality as the 35mm and 120 equivalents. 4x5 is a bit better in this respect, allowing for less sag, better lenses, easier scanning etc. All that said, if you are looking for the ultimate in grain free, sharp images with lots of detail, I would say more often than not a MFD like an IQ150 or 100mp plus digital camera will give you sharper results. You might not pick up the same level of detail, but it will have lower grain, more depth of field, and sharper lenses. The look is different, surely. In general, however, I agree with you, but image quality is a very personal subject, and one that varies dramatically depending on desires and expectations. For a lot of my young clients, the ideal image quality is "poorly processed color negative film".

Anyway, for fun I am attaching an 8x10 slide I shot and processed a few weeks ago. I would post the crop, but of course, I ran out of my 500kb limit by posting a single photo.

 

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

[Advertisement]

The Leica Q3 is available for pre-order at B&H Photo Video and Adorama

[bilbrown]

On 11/16/2019 at 2:44 AM, Stuart Richardson said:

I think you are right that we are nearing (or already at) a plateau. Digital camera technology with pro cameras has been "good enough" for the vast majority of normal uses for a number of years now. There have been more improvements in camera usage (better EVFs, video, high iso, connectivity etc), but in general, a Nikon D800, Leica S006 or Sony A7R will satisfy the image quality needs of most users printing up to 100cm wide. So in that case, I would completely agree that it is better to stick with something you like. I have been using the S006 for six years now because nothing came along that beat it for me. At the moment, however, I think my sensor is showing its age (and/or it needs calibration)...I get more noise than I remember when lifting the shadows, and sometimes I get subtle color shifts between the two sides of the centerfold of the chips. Additionally, in my studio work I would really like live view, and in my exhibition work I could really appreciate more resolution (I have done some work from the S at 170x140cm in a 4x5 crop, and that pushes it to the limit....I know for most it does not matter, but I would love that extra resolution, especially as I usually crop to 4x5). 

I do agree about color science...I have yet to see a digital camera that has better color, though I have to admit that the Panasonic S1 has impressed me. It is the only other digital camera I have used that is not a Leica, where the color looks right to me. I am using the Camera Natural profile, which I found to be very pleasing. 

In any case, we have somewhat of an embarrassment of riches at the moment. The S is one of the best cameras ever made if you take it as a package. The integration of the system is second to none, the VF superb, the lenses are great, battery life is superb, weather sealing, image quality, selectable focal plane or leaf shutters...the color science, image quality...it is hard to achieve these things, even with technology which is a decade or more newer. Outside of the S, the rest of the industry has come a very long way with their lens quality and system quality as well, so whether you want to shoot an SL, Fuji G system or Sony/Canon/Nikon etc, it is more than likely that you will be able to find a body and lens combination that will give spectacular results. Better to just try to evaluate it on the basis of your use and your needs, rather than try to justify to the world why it is the best and only choice. 

 

 

Embarrassment of riches indeed, I tested the SL2, SL, and Sigma FP against each other briefly the yesterday using the Duclos modded Leica R 60 MACRO (to get super close focus), I am going to add the Lumix S1 to get a feel for all of the current 24MP sensors against the 47MP optimized sensor of the SL2 - I may even throw in a few similar shots from the S 007 for good measure, and maybe even footage from my RED.

 

The R 60 is a lens that has been used by me for quite a few things, works well on the SL1, and also my RED Scarlet W. The R lenses without a doubt are some of the best renders I have gotten on FF sensors or even dual ISO optimized (meta data only) cinema sensors. Since Leica has mentioned on its page how a cinematographer said he sent some of the footage from the SL2 to his colorist with RED files, and the colorist asked if "he got another RED" I want to prove that this isnt just marketing and it is true to form. That would be a HUGE plus for me!! The Monster sensor on the RED is essentially 36MP, so I can see that the higher resolution could work. The Scarlet W is a S35 5K sensor and with the SL2 shooting 5K, that fits to a degree with my current workflow 

 

I will say, right out of the gate - the SL2 files look GOOD down-res'd, but on a closer look - focus even with IBIS turned on is really hard to nail. Maybe this was my settings. I wasn't paying close attention to what my shutter speed was because I wanted to see what it was like when the camera itself chose the exposure triangle.

 

 

I will post my results.

 

The top is the SL1

The bottom is the SL2

 

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

[xiaubauu2009]

2 hours ago, bilbrown said:

Embarrassment of riches indeed, I tested the SL2, SL, and Sigma FP against each other briefly the yesterday using the Duclos modded Leica R 60 MACRO (to get super close focus), I am going to add the Lumix S1 to get a feel for all of the current 24MP sensors against the 47MP optimized sensor of the SL2 - I may even throw in a few similar shots from the S 007 for good measure, and maybe even footage from my RED.

 

The R 60 is a lens that has been used by me for quite a few things, works well on the SL1, and also my RED Scarlet W. The R lenses without a doubt are some of the best renders I have gotten on FF sensors or even dual ISO optimized (meta data only) cinema sensors. Since Leica has mentioned on its page how a cinematographer said he sent some of the footage from the SL2 to his colorist with RED files, and the colorist asked if "he got another RED" I want to prove that this isnt just marketing and it is true to form. That would be a HUGE plus for me!! The Monster sensor on the RED is essentially 36MP, so I can see that the higher resolution could work. The Scarlet W is a S35 5K sensor and with the SL2 shooting 5K, that fits to a degree with my current workflow 

 

I will say, right out of the gate - the SL2 files look GOOD down-res'd, but on a closer look - focus even with IBIS turned on is really hard to nail. Maybe this was my settings. I wasn't paying close attention to what my shutter speed was because I wanted to see what it was like when the camera itself chose the exposure triangle.

 

 

I will post my results.

 

The top is the SL1

The bottom is the SL2

 

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

That is just camera shake, the IBIS working properly????

[xiaubauu2009]

3 hours ago, Stuart Richardson said:

Well, yes and no. I am using 8x10 and 4x5 regularly...more often than the S these days. In many circumstances it is possible to get sharper imagery out of them, but not always. Certainly the image quality is unique, but image quality can mean a lot of different things. For example, 8x10 is inherently soft...it just hits you with brute force in terms of film area. The 100% detail is fairly low in most cases, due to things like miniscule depth of field, film sag and imprecision in the cameras and lenses (the tolerances of a giant wood camera with friction mount lenses and film backs, combined with 250mm-600mm lenses means that you are not getting tack sharp grain level resolution like you might with an M7 and 50mm APO Summicron. You are saved by the gigantic size. This holds to scanning as well, where 8x10 is rarely scanned at as high a quality as the 35mm and 120 equivalents. 4x5 is a bit better in this respect, allowing for less sag, better lenses, easier scanning etc. All that said, if you are looking for the ultimate in grain free, sharp images with lots of detail, I would say more often than not a MFD like an IQ150 or 100mp plus digital camera will give you sharper results. You might not pick up the same level of detail, but it will have lower grain, more depth of field, and sharper lenses. The look is different, surely. In general, however, I agree with you, but image quality is a very personal subject, and one that varies dramatically depending on desires and expectations. For a lot of my young clients, the ideal image quality is "poorly processed color negative film".

Anyway, for fun I am attaching an 8x10 slide I shot and processed a few weeks ago. I would post the crop, but of course, I ran out of my 500kb limit by posting a single photo.

 

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

I think for just pure IQ (resolution, sharpness, clean etc), Digital film back of about 80mega pixel is already way ahead of any large format film, (4x5, 8x10, etc), however, I think the 'look' of a 8x10 perspective is just so unique that it will take a long time before digital can ever match it, unless you stitch the hell out of the files from digital back and get a 300mpx image to get that look of a large format. 150mm is consider an super ultra wide on a 8x10....

Lovely photo by the way, and shooting these color 8x10 is really costing an arm and a leg!!! painful!!!

[bilbrown]

1 hour ago, xiaubauu2009 said:

That is just camera shake, the IBIS working properly????

Evidently not. Oh and this was with the 60R in both cases.

 

I will post the video of how I edited them on my YouTube shortly after I add a few things. There were some very interesting differences in how the files had to be edited to get the same exposure - both in P mode. The SL1 was darker by a stop at least and rendered highlights better IMHO. The SL2 was more even and exposed basically “normal” for most people. 
 

I kind of think someone going deep into the files, like say a fashion retoucher, will really dig the extra resolution. However working with the files as a single photographer will take some getting used to - especially if the IBIS is finicky. 
 

The SL2 was the store’s display model, I’m sure a lot of hands had touched it. I will be going on the photo walk with one on the 24th here in LA. So will our it through it’s paces then. 

Edited November 19, 2019 by bilbrown
More info

[helged]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

9 hours ago, bilbrown said:

Embarrassment of riches indeed, I tested the SL2, SL, and Sigma FP against each other briefly the yesterday using the Duclos modded Leica R 60 MACRO (to get super close focus), I am going to add the Lumix S1 to get a feel for all of the current 24MP sensors against the 47MP optimized sensor of the SL2 - I may even throw in a few similar shots from the S 007 for good measure, and maybe even footage from my RED.

 

The R 60 is a lens that has been used by me for quite a few things, works well on the SL1, and also my RED Scarlet W. The R lenses without a doubt are some of the best renders I have gotten on FF sensors or even dual ISO optimized (meta data only) cinema sensors. Since Leica has mentioned on its page how a cinematographer said he sent some of the footage from the SL2 to his colorist with RED files, and the colorist asked if "he got another RED" I want to prove that this isnt just marketing and it is true to form. That would be a HUGE plus for me!! The Monster sensor on the RED is essentially 36MP, so I can see that the higher resolution could work. The Scarlet W is a S35 5K sensor and with the SL2 shooting 5K, that fits to a degree with my current workflow 

 

I will say, right out of the gate - the SL2 files look GOOD down-res'd, but on a closer look - focus even with IBIS turned on is really hard to nail. Maybe this was my settings. I wasn't paying close attention to what my shutter speed was because I wanted to see what it was like when the camera itself chose the exposure triangle.

 

 

I will post my results.

 

The top is the SL1

The bottom is the SL2

 

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

For IBIS to work, with a non-recognised Leica lens, you have to type the (exact) focal length of your lens in the menu. When using a Leica R lens with ROM contacts and using the Leica R-to-L adapter, the focal length will be automatically transferred to the body. For all other adapters, and for all non-ROM'ed R-lenses irrespective of adapter, the focal length has to be typed. When correct focal length is passed to the body, you can gain 4-5 stops with the IBIS. For lenses with OIS, like Leica SL 24-90 and SL 90-280, you may gain an additional stop stabilisation, yielding about 5 stops. The IBIS has impressed me a lot; I have tick sharp photos with the large, heavy Nikkor 400mm f2.8E with shutter speeds below 1/60 sec, and with the SL 75 with shutter speeds of several thenths of seconds. For static subjects, that is. And when you start out with properly (hand) held camera. The above assume that the IBIS in SL2 is similar to and works similarly to that in S1R, which I understand is the case. 

Edited November 19, 2019 by helged

[bilbrown]

14 minutes ago, helged said:

For IBIS to work, with a non-recognised Leica lens, you have to type the (exact) focal length of your LENS in the menu. When using a Leica R lens with ROM contacts and using the Leica R-to-L adapter, the focal length will be automatically transferred to the body. For all other adapters, and for all non-ROM'ed R-lenses irredpective of adapter, the focal length has to be typed. When correct focal length is passed to the body, you can gain 4-5 stops with the IBIS. For lenses with OIS, like Leica SL 24-90 and SL 90-280, you may gain an additional stop stabilisation, yielding about 5 stops. The IBIS has impressed me a lot; I have tick sharp photos with the large, heavy Nikkor 400mm f2.8E with shutter speeds below 1/60 sec, and with the SL 75 with shutter speeds of several thenths of seconds. For static subjects, that is. And when you start out with properly (hand) held camera. The above assume that the IBIS in SL2 is similar to and works similarly to that in S1R, which I understand is the case. 

Okay, so I didn't know that nor did I do the extra work. I will try again on Sunday.

 

Thank you.

[Guest]

Interesting.  All lenses (and bodies) out of stock at Leica Store Miami:

https://leicastoremiami.com/collections/s-system-lenses

Does that make sense?  System error?

[Jeff S]

Leica Store DC has no S007s, and seemed  surprised that I even inquired. When I was there about 6 months ago, they were eager to demo.

Jeff

[Jon Warwick]

On 11/18/2019 at 9:50 PM, geetee1972 said:

It's interesting to think while we discuss the virtues of image quality and whether this camera or that offers the ultimate IQ, that it is stil the case that the ultimate IQ is still good old fashioned 8x10 or 4x5 film. I just wish it were easier to work with but then if it was, we would all be doing it.

I’ve seen some incredible 90” prints off 8x10 in galleries. Mitch Epstein’s work comes to mind. The colour tonality and “sharpness” of his works were extraordinary.
 

I’ve casually played with IQ150 files and my gut feel is that a flawless 8x10 (which can he hard to achieve) has the digital beat across most image quality factors at that extreme 90” print size.

But up to 60-70”, I’d say the high high megapixel digital medium format backs compare really really well ...and given the complete lack of grain, the image quality “feels” more like 8x10 than they do 4x5. 

Aside from “resolution”, I think an even bigger difference is the highlight response and colour tonality between these digi backs and film. That said, in this regard, I was impressed by how continuous the feel of the images (eg, in terms of tonality) was of Greg Crewdson’s “Cathedral of the Pines” series (done with digital) compared to his earlier series of works like “Beneath the Roses” (on 8x10).

[Sailronin]

The SL is a "full frame" i.e. 35 mm format while the S is a(n) (almost) medium format.  The difference in sensor size is the reason I went with an S(006) when they came out.  I wasn't concerned with the number of megapixels as much as the difference in rendering of a medium format v 35mm.  Maybe it's in my head but I've always preferred medium format over 35mm just as 35mm is (in my mind) superior to smaller film/sensor sizes.

If this is not important to you then the SL will be all you'll ever need as ZNHL said in his comment.

[John McMaster]

I pretty much always shot MF film, 35mm was too grainy and lacked tonality.  Played with 5x4 in the field but not really successfully, although that and 10x8 were studio stalwarts.  Seem to be coming back to that as I mostly shoot S(007) or CCD Monochrom at 5000 ISO!

john

[Guest]

10 hours ago, Jeff S said:

Leica Store DC has no S007s, and seemed  surprised that I even inquired. When I was there about 6 months ago, they were eager to demo.

Jeff

I visited the DC store in July.  I had taken a S-lens with me to have the firmware upgraded so that I could use it on the SL.  They indeed had no S-bodies in stock...  They were very helpful though and provided me with the contact information of a Leica specialist who was able to help me out.  That is DC though.  Leica Store Miami typically always has S-bodies and S-lenses in stock.  David Farkas is a big advocate of the system.  To see that they have no bodies and no lenses at all in stock is very unusual...

[Jeff S]

Sure, I’ve used Leica Miami and know the folks there.  My point was as much about the attitude change as the inventory change regarding the S system at DC.  Over the past several years, they’ve always had a body or more to demo, and enthusiastically embraced and promoted the system.  This time was more meh, don’t have anything, don’t expect anything and neither should you.  Maybe that will change if and when an S3 emerges, but for now it seemed that it might as well be dead.

Jeff

[Jon Warwick]

2 hours ago, Sailronin said:

The SL is a "full frame" i.e. 35 mm format while the S is a(n) (almost) medium format.  The difference in sensor size is the reason I went with an S(006) when they came out.  I wasn't concerned with the number of megapixels as much as the difference in rendering of a medium format v 35mm.  Maybe it's in my head but I've always preferred medium format over 35mm just as 35mm is (in my mind) superior to smaller film/sensor sizes.

If this is not important to you then the SL will be all you'll ever need as ZNHL said in his comment.

I don’t necessarily disagree with you.
 

It’s just not clear to me “why” digital medium format can sometimes give the impression of a different “look” to 35mm digital?

after all ....

(1) Many of the 16 bit cameras are really just 14 bit (+ extra 2 bits of RAW processing).

(2) I can change a lens and get a similar field of view between the medium format and 35mm full frames, and hence negate that as the argument.

And yet, the medium format digitals can sometimes (but not always) look a bit smoother and less digital than 35mm digital.

I’m not sure why that is? 
Is is because the enlargement factor (for the same size print) isn’t as many multiples due to the larger sensor - so less pressure on the lens? Or Is it simply because medium format is typically higher megapixels and - hence - there is less guessing and less “faked” data across the red / green / blue filter? Or something else?

[bilbrown]

2 hours ago, Jeff S said:

Sure, I’ve used Leica Miami and know the folks there.  My point was as much about the attitude change as the inventory change regarding the S system at DC.  Over the past several years, they’ve always had a body or more to demo, and enthusiastically embraced and promoted the system.  This time was more meh, don’t have anything, don’t expect anything and neither should you.  Maybe that will change if and when an S3 emerges, but for now it seemed that it might as well be dead.

Jeff

 

I got a similar response from the Leica Store LA, and in France and Italy. In fact when I thought to trade my S system they said, "it just sits on the shelf and we can't sell it. We'll pass, but we will certainly take your CCD Monochrom, APO 50 and SL 90-280.." Adorama wanted to take my S (007) but at a huge, huge loss.

[Jeff S]

2 minutes ago, bilbrown said:

 

I got a similar response from the Leica Store LA, and in France and Italy. In fact when I thought to trade my S system they said, "it just sits on the shelf and we can't sell it. We'll pass, but we will certainly take your CCD Monochrom, APO 50 and SL 90-280.." Adorama wanted to take my S (007) but at a huge, huge loss.

I can understand reluctance to add used inventory, or to lowball the offer, but the lack of interest and enthusiasm in stocking or discussing new product altogether was disheartening.

Jeff

[ropo54]

13 minutes ago, Jeff S said:

I can understand reluctance to add used inventory, or to lowball the offer, but the lack of interest and enthusiasm in stocking or discussing new product altogether was disheartening.

Jeff

I'd add that Leica is at fault for not promoting its S product line, as well.  If Leica would be more forthcoming with its commitment to the S system,   it would generate enthusiasm, help generate sales, so that the Leica stores would be beneficiaries.  Terribly short sighted and maybe even a bit selfish not to do so.  

(And,  Leica store customers might also be upset with their local Leica stores for lack of support for their existing products sold. It translates negatively across the whole Leica brand universe).

Edited November 23, 2019 by ropo54

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Interesting Leica gear

[Jeff S]

2 minutes ago, ropo54 said:

I'd add that Leica is at fault for not promoting its S product line, as well.  If Leica would be more forthcoming with its commitment to the S system,   it would generate enthusiasm, help generate sales, so that the Leica stores would be beneficiaries.  Terribly short sighted and maybe even a bit selfish not to do so.

The industry, the competition, and market segment pricing, have changed dramatically since the S was introduced.  Then the lens AF debacle, which was made worse IMO because of the lack of proactive and transparent communication, let alone the refusal to recall product. So we’ll see if and when the S3 is finally released, how it’s marketed and priced.  Meanwhile, the Store sales staff doesn’t seem interested.

Jeff